Another Brent question

[Anonymous]

You know I have been affiliated with Eastern for many years. Therefore when the resurgence and relaunching efforts were evolving over the years, it always perplexing to me on how DCPS configure Eastern's future population.

Here me out, we were constantly referring to the E-H/Eastern component as we have seen how it worked with the Deal/Wilson situation. Yet, it always was greeted as a "that's been done" we have something else for Eastern.

See, through the countless Superintendents and now Chancellors we silently wondered about this city-wide attraction for Eastern. As a PP stated the goal was to ready the high-school first and can we honestly say that the high-schools are ready? I kow time is of the essence but in due time the middle-elementary school components will be fixed.

Go ahead and say it; that's easy for you to say.

[Anonymous]

Word salad...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: Until something drastic happens, I think we'll each have to find our way through different public, charter, and private options. And maybe that's actually a good thing because middle school needs are quite possibly the most different for different kids. These are the most difficult years to teach (my MIL is a veteran middle school teacher in the Philly suburbs) and call for individual solutions. The more I think about it, the less I think total vertical alignment between ES, MS, and HS is a useful concept.

A positive spin on a situation that's terribly unfair to those paying the bulk of the property tax collected on the Hill (go on, refute this in that hackneyed DCUM way by arguing that all taxpayers are created equal in the eyes of DCPS/the Lord).

I must not have been around long enough to grasp why upper-middle-class Hill voters appear to have been fairly passive in challenging the MS status quo - because there aren't enough high-SES parents with kids in Ward 6 public schools approaching MS age yet? Because distant charters have proven somewhat effective in picking up the slack? If our elected officials aren't serious about working with the parents of the strongest neighborhood students to develop high-performing middle school programs on a par with the best in VA and MD, where colleagues and friends send their children, shouldn't they be voted out?

Why should DCPS be in a position to burden the Brent, Maury and Tyler parents with dead-ended MS feeds indefinitely when there would be room enough for almost all Hill MS kids at a much improved Stuart Hobson? Something "drastic" happening means changing the feeder system so that all Hill kids may attend, and a full complement of honors/advanced courses is offered. SH obviously shouldn't primarily serve Ward 7 and 8 kids; it probably shouldn't accomodate OOB kids at all. If rapidly reinventing SH's student population means introducing test-in programs with Fairfax and MoCo level bars to clear, and most Hill parents say they want them, bring such programs on.

The crux of the problem is that none of us has any guarantee that our child(ren) can receive a quality public MS education in the city. We lack assurances when lottery luck is the sole admissions criterion for the only appealing OOB option (Deal) and the best charters (Latin, Two Rivers, maybe Basis), which aren't up to suburban magnet standards, not even close. The baby boom on the Hill will soon jeopardize broad access to the only public middle schools high-SES families have reason to touch. Moreover, ample disposable income (available to few families in a government town) or povery coupled with exceptional ability and preparation will remain the brutal admissions critera for privates.

Our politicians sell us down the river, and we accept it to the point that we move to the burbs or practically bankrupt ourselves at Sidwell to stay in the city rather than fight back with gumption at the grassroots. I'm not going to go so far as to say that we collectively deserve what we get, but an outsider might reasonably come to that conclusion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Until something drastic happens, I think we'll each have to find our way through different public, charter, and private options. And maybe that's actually a good thing because middle school needs are quite possibly the most different for different kids. These are the most difficult years to teach (my MIL is a veteran middle school teacher in the Philly suburbs) and call for individual solutions. The more I think about it, the less I think total vertical alignment between ES, MS, and HS is a useful concept.

A positive spin on a situation that's terribly unfair to those paying the bulk of the property tax collected on the Hill (go on, refute this in that hackneyed DCUM way by arguing that all taxpayers are created equal in the eyes of DCPS/the Lord).

I must not have been around long enough to grasp why upper-middle-class Hill voters appear to have been fairly passive in challenging the MS status quo - because there aren't enough high-SES parents with kids in Ward 6 public schools approaching MS age yet? Because distant charters have proven somewhat effective in picking up the slack? If our elected officials aren't serious about working with the parents of the strongest neighborhood students to develop high-performing middle school programs on a par with the best in VA and MD, where colleagues and friends send their children, shouldn't they be voted out?

Why should DCPS be in a position to burden the Brent, Maury and Tyler parents with dead-ended MS feeds indefinitely when there would be room enough for almost all Hill MS kids at a much improved Stuart Hobson? Something "drastic" happening means changing the feeder system so that all Hill kids may attend, and a full complement of honors/advanced courses is offered. SH obviously shouldn't primarily serve Ward 7 and 8 kids; it probably shouldn't accomodate OOB kids at all. If rapidly reinventing SH's student population means introducing test-in programs with Fairfax and MoCo level bars to clear, and most Hill parents say they want them, bring such programs on.

The crux of the problem is that none of us has any guarantee that our child(ren) can receive a quality public MS education in the city. We lack assurances when lottery luck is the sole admissions criterion for the only appealing OOB option (Deal) and the best charters (Latin, Two Rivers, maybe Basis), which aren't up to suburban magnet standards, not even close. The baby boom on the Hill will soon jeopardize broad access to the only public middle schools high-SES families have reason to touch. Moreover, ample disposable income (available to few families in a government town) or povery coupled with exceptional ability and preparation will remain the brutal admissions critera for privates.

Our politicians sell us down the river, and we accept it to the point that we move to the burbs or practically bankrupt ourselves at Sidwell to stay in the city rather than fight back with gumption at the grassroots. I'm not going to go so far as to say that we collectively deserve what we get, but an outsider might reasonably come to that conclusion.

+1

[Anonymous]

15:21 you are simply ahead of your time, maybe 20 years ahead.

In a generation, there will be a critical mass of clear thinking high-SES parents in the city with children in public school who are motivated and politically powerful enough to send politicians, and their DCPS and DC Charter appointess, packing if they don't deliver MoCo and Fairfax quality middle and high school programs.

We are such a long way from a critical mass of Ward 6 parents prepared to fight for suburban quality schools that the individual readily becomes unmotivated.

[Anonymous]

Why can't we ever just answer the op's question and leave it at that??

[Anonymous]

Tha boom of children on the Hll has just started to hit 4-6th grade and it's only getting larger. This may end up making the Hill like much of the rest of the downtown core where families move after the early elementary years. A shame.

The only way to fix SH is to feed from Brent, Watkins, Maury, And LT. Period. That's where the higher SES parents are willing to risk elementary (not really LT, but it's too close to ignore). That will still be a hard lift, but it's the best way to keep SH filled with in bounds ward 6 kids and have neighborhood support.

Let's be serious -- SH is too small and it is a waste to renovate it if the neighborhood families are going to reject it. Close LT and change SH and families may stay on the Hill through high school/Eastern.

[Anonymous]

What schools feed to SH (Watkins, and?)? And, how many kids (total) in those fifth grade classes vs. total number of kids in SH 6th grade class, i.e., is the SH 6th grade class completely full with kids from current feeders, or is the SH 6th grade class half filled by feeders, then the other half filled by lottery? If the latter, it is pretty ridiculous that other nearby elementaries, e.g., Brent and Maury, don't feed into SH.

[Anonymous]

14:50, go toss someone's salad. Be gone, you troll.

[Anonymous]

It just something about the issue of property tax payers versus non-paying property tax payers; with property tax payers wanting exclusive treatment when it comes to free public education.

That luxury would only be true if the school boundaries were drawn in a composition to include exclusive neighborhoods. The neighborhood of Cap-Hill has those who live in the public housing (Potomac Gardens), so to exclude them from their right to a free-public education because of property taxes is not fair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What schools feed to SH (Watkins, and?)? And, how many kids (total) in those fifth grade classes vs. total number of kids in SH 6th grade class, i.e., is the SH 6th grade class completely full with kids from current feeders, or is the SH 6th grade class half filled by feeders, then the other half filled by lottery? If the latter, it is pretty ridiculous that other nearby elementaries, e.g., Brent and Maury, don't feed into SH.

Three schools feed to SH:
Watkins, Ludlow Taylor, and JO Wilson

In 2011-12, those schools enrolled the following # of 5th graders: 87, 32, 27 = 146 students

SH 6th grade for 2012-13 has about 145 students enrolled, and will have 5 sections of 6th grade. So 6th grade classes will have close to 30 students.

The current designated feeders essentially fill up SH. If you want to have fewer OOB students at SH, you have to have fewer OOB at Watkins, LT, and JO Wilson. To do that, you have to close and consolidate in bounds Ward 6 students into fewer elementary schools. Many of the Hill elementary schools are 50% or more OOB students.

[Anonymous]

In this case, less may be more when it comes to closing schools . . .

[Anonymous]

Four not-so-complicated, or expensive, avenues of advance to reinvent SH as a true neighborhood school within just 2 or 3 years:

1) close LT
2) allow Brent, Tyler and Maury to feed in
3) offer honors/advanced courses in all core subjects, with standards comparable to similar classes in MoCo and Fairfax
4) set up test-in magents, using suburban models (e.g Takoma Park and Eastern in Silver Spring, both have a county-wide draw with 1/4 of spots reserved for local kids), one for math/science and another for communications/humanities. Don't be afraid to let magnet demographics mirror those of the Hill (not majority AA).

Tell Wells this is what you want and/or find an opponent to support who gets it.

[Anonymous]

Hello current Watkins parents? Would you support this plan at Stuart Hobson? Maybe someone should make this a spin off thread

[Anonymous]

Yes. But I'm not active in PTA and so can't claim insight into what issues these proposals would run up against. I loved Peabody and have been okay with Watkins, but the older grades/middle school seem like such a crap shoot. Racial and class tensions seem palpable at times among the various parent groups. The PTA works hard but is dominated by white and higher income families and, I think, is discounted by other stakeholders for that reason. I wonder if the sheer number of families at Watkins makes change hard and, over time, families who push for higher standards peel off in dismay. There are so many different cohorts, all with their causes. Some parents vocally support gifted programs, for example. But push back comes from other quarters who feel, at least as strongly, that resources should be aimed at improving scores for lower performing children. I can't tell you how many times I've heard teachers and parents of older children urge me and others to support tracking for the upper grades. But for reasons not fully clear to me this seems politically unpalatable. Ultimately, who "owns" the school? I live in bounds and am committed to public schools but don't want to push my kid under the bus to make a point. So, like many others, unless things change, we'll likely switch to a charter, if we can get in, or maybe even move if that seems more economical than private school tuition. And, for what it is worth, my kid is smart but not exceptional. I would be willing to stay for something that is decent but not for something that is notably sub-par.